Spend some actual time with that device, and tell me that you can last more than a few minutes: squinting with one eye gets very tiring and painful very fast. And talking to the stupid thing — one looks/sounds like a fool.

This reminds me of all the people I see taking pictures/video with their tablets. It looks utterly stupid. Also, initially pretty much everyone thought people having conversations with their BT ear dongles looked/sounded ridiculous. It's pretty much accepted now.

It will be a long time before we get to level 5, fully autonomous. In the meantime there will be a driver in driverless cars and the driver will be expected to take control of the vehicle under certain situations.

This reminds me of all the people I see taking pictures/video with their tablets. It looks utterly stupid. Also, initially pretty much everyone thought people having conversations with their BT ear dongles looked/sounded ridiculous. It's pretty much accepted now.

Oddly enough, taking pictures with a tablet looks great to me. I always loved 8 X 10 view cameras, as clunky and heavy as they are. Being able to actually step back and view the whole scene was great. Squinting through a little hole to frame the view was always a pain in comparison.

@beluga
I don't consider driverless cars innovative, or google glass. When you ship the finished product you get to claim innovation; until then it's a dream, even if you have working models, it's a dream with working models. Here's an example. A health tracking device small enough to imbed in a small slit cut into the earlobe. It tracks heart rate, blood pressure, glucose levels, etc. That's a dream. When somebody ships it, that's innovation.

@beluga
I don't consider driverless cars innovative, or google glass. When you ship the finished product you get to claim innovation; until then it's a dream, even if you have working models, it's a dream with working models. Here's an example. A health tracking device small enough to imbed in a small slit cut into the earlobe. It tracks heart rate, blood pressure, glucose levels, etc. That's a dream. When somebody ships it, that's innovation.

Just curious are other companies asked about whether the stuff they're working on is improvements to existing products or new categories? It seems like Apple is the only company where this question is constantly asked. I can't remember the last time Google or Microsoft was asked this question.

It's because behind closed doors, everybody knows they're waiting for Apple to move first like they always do. If they said that publicly, they'd weaken Apple's competition. The strategy is to always keep prodding Apple to come up with cool things but never thank them for it - treat them mean to keep them keen. People are held to different standards in all sorts of things and it's usually based on standards they hold themselves to. If a kid is the smartest in their school but they get a slightly lower grade, there's disappointment whereas a kid with constantly lower or failing grades is expected to fail. Apple's competition tend to be the latter. Not necessarily the F students but the B and C students. Google Glass, Galaxy Gear, well at least they tried, here's the certificate for attendance.

I noticed that Tim mentioned not liking any areas where they are second. One of the most prominent is being second to Samsung in sales volume. The problem here is the iPod. It's a class of device that is trending down fast:

43m 2011, 35m 2012, 26m 2013

The revenue is now the lowest of any category. Assuming that trend keeps up, there has to be a point where they replace it with something. People buying at the price point of the iPod Touch want a phone now, not just a music player. If they modify the Touch into a phone somehow, they can hit the lower-end prepay market and developing market, they'd just have to be careful and not make it so nice that people would avoid buying the higher models.

Whatever it is, that iPod trend gives an idea of the timeframe too. If it keeps going like that, it'll be 2014 or 2015 that its replacement arrives.

Just curious are other companies asked about whether the stuff they're working on is improvements to existing products or new categories? It seems like Apple is the only company where this question is constantly asked. I can't remember the last time Google or Microsoft was asked this question.

Or intel. People seem satisfied with Moore's law, and aren't clamoring for whole new inventions.

@Beluga
and island hermitHa! Boy have I been schooled! I stand corrected, and tip my hat to you both!Still like the shipped innovation best!

Technology companies have a history of making bold claims but never delivering. The caveat is that the innovative technology itself may not be the consumer product rather an enabling technology for a consumer device.

Innovating without shipping is referred to as a non-practicing entity (NPE) which is often referred to as a patent troll although these aren't necessarily the same concept.

Tim looks terrible- I am talking skin, which is the mirror to one’s health. He looks thin, tired and terribly wrinkly for someone who is only fifty-three. I remember noting this a year or so ago but the pictures and videos of recent look even worse.

My suspicions is that the man’s diet is not healthy for him. Either he eats junk food (I think not) or he is on some kind of diet that might drive him down the same spiral that claimed his predecessor. The third possibility is that no matter what he does, his genes rule and he, or his skin just ages faster than the average.

We all make choices that influence our health. I doubt he smokes. I doubt he does drugs. I have read he exercises and whether that is extreme or moderate I haven’t a clue. If his food choices are political, well that is his choice.

I think he looks twenty years older than fifty-three.

I hope he is carefully cultivating his successor. We’ve been down this road before.

(I have had two friends whose skin made them look twenty years older than their age. One smoked the other did not. Both ate well, were not over weight and were quite fit, but their skin continued to age exponentially. It may just be genetic and the rest of his vitals may be quite vigorous and healthy.)

When I find time to rewrite the laws of Physics, there'll Finally be some changes made round here!

I am not crazy! Three out of five court appointed psychiatrists said so.

Tim Cook revealed the company is hard at work on devices any "reasonable" person would consider to be new product categories.Note: Dumb Analysts, Wall Street lazy ass fatties, android / google losers are NOT considered "Reasonable"!

The vast majority of people think that the iPad was the first tablet thus for them it was a 'new product category'.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

Tim looks terrible- I am talking skin, which is the mirror to one’s health. He looks thin, tired and terribly wrinkly for someone who is only fifty-three. I remember noting this a year or so ago but the pictures and videos of recent look even worse.

My suspicions is that the man’s diet is not healthy for him. Either he eats junk food (I think not) or he is on some kind of diet that might drive him down the same spiral that claimed his predecessor. The third possibility is that no matter what he does, his genes rule and he, or his skin just ages faster than the average.

We all make choices that influence our health. I doubt he smokes. I doubt he does drugs. I have read he exercises and whether that is extreme or moderate I haven’t a clue. If his food choices are political, well that is his choice.

I think he looks twenty years older than fifty-three.

I hope he is carefully cultivating his successor. We’ve been down this road before.

(I have had two friends whose skin made them look twenty years older than their age. One smoked the other did not. Both ate well, were not over weight and were quite fit, but their skin continued to age exponentially. It may just be genetic and the rest of his vitals may be quite vigorous and healthy.)

I was watching a PBS show about 1964. When the 1964 election was discussed it reminded me that both Johnson and Goldwater were in their 50s at this time. Both around the same age as Tim. Both looked even older than Tim. Both men looked to be late 60s, early 70s. Johnson died young, in his early 60s. Goldwater lived to be 89.

Why don't you tell us what problem it is that GG is providing a solution to?

These look like some pretty cool uses of GG

The first app is the Moment Camera, an automatic camera that captures footage throughout the day without any user input.

“Like a pro photographer, Moment tries to take photos of the people, places, and times you care about,” says the Moment Camera website. “Over time, you make Moment smarter by telling it how it’s doing.”

Next up is Captioning on Glass, a companion app for Android devices that can transcribe voice into text. The text will then appear on the heads-up display of Google Glass, which the developers hope will “assist the hard-of-hearing in everyday conversations.”

Finally, Quest Visual is looking to update its translation app, Word Lens, to make use of the smartglasses. With the Word Lens app on Android and iOS, users are able to hold their phones up to signs and see an immediate translation of the printed text. Porting the app to Google Glass will cut out the middleman, allowing users to simply say, “OK Glass, translate this,” and the translation will appear on the display.

I spent a couple of hours with GG a couple of weeks ago. The most utterly laughable product ever.

There are serious social issues with it. But to call it laughable is to ignore the evolutionary steps that must be taken for new technology to become truly usable, acceptable and productive. It also shows a lack of appreciation for technology. With all due respect, you're clearly not an engineer or technophile.

Honestly to needs to stop talking about new products especially when everybody knows he's not going to offer up any details. All we get now is the media mocking his statements because they're the same statements he's made umpteen times before. All he has to do is say "you're going to like what you see" and leave it at that. Don't get into any discussions on timelines or whether it's updates to existing products or new "categories". I'm not aware of any other tech company getting grilled as much about new product "categories" as Apple does. Tim needs to stop letting Wall Street and the media push him around.

Want to quit playing defense and start playing offense!

Depends on where you sit. That strategy really reinforces the view that Apple products are intended for consumers and any business applications are purely coincidental. Consumers don't need to plan a year or two out, and "like to be surprised." Businesses need to have a plan for capital spending and don't like being kept in the dark about issues that will affect them. I know a year in advance what Intel plans to do, and, as long as I order enough seats, my VAR will work with me to make sure I get what I need when I need it. Apple won't even commit to a particular model CONTINUING to be available much less give any indication of what might be in the pipeline or when it might be available. That's not cute, that's a formula for making sure Mac stays a niche product forever.

I don't think Cook was speaking to the public at that moment. I think it was a "wink wink, nudge nudge" moment for Wall Street's ears.

BTW... your second sentence says the same thing twice.

Read it again because it doesn't. Say Apple introduces a full fledged TV set, that’s a well known product that Apple doesn't currently make so it would be a 'new product category' for them but while most of us knew there were tablets before the iPad, a great many people didn’t, so tablets became an entirely new 'new product category'.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

Read it again because it doesn't. Say Apple introduces a full fledged TV set, that’s a well known product that Apple doesn't currently make so it would be a 'new product category' for them but while most of us knew there were tablets before the iPad, a great many people didn’t, so tablets became an entirely new 'new product category'.

OFFS. It doesn't matter how popular it was before Apple made it. If it was available to consumers then it is only a new product category in Apple's line-up... regardless of its popularity prior to the introduction.

A new new product category is something that was never available to consumers prior to that time... the first cars, the first steam engines, the first computers, the first home computers... or any other zillion different products.

If it was available on the shelves before Apple made its product then it is only new to Apple.

Tim looks terrible- I am talking skin, which is the mirror to one’s health. He looks thin, tired and terribly wrinkly for someone who is only fifty-three. I remember noting this a year or so ago but the pictures and videos of recent look even worse.

<...>

You do not say anything about this to Wall Street, OK ?

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Yes, Apple's share is suffering from catastrophic collapse...unless you look at the fact that Apple continues to gain share in the total mobile market...

The share percent is going down. But mainly because the total number has gone up. iOS device sales are holding basically steady while Android and Windows devices increase in number, flooding the market due to the lower price. As you note, often from folks that had little intention of getting a smart phone but deciding to ditch the flip because the cost for say an Android phone is so little (and often put on sale with BOGO etc).

What numbers we don't see are adjusted for returns and actual usage percents. There are many companies out there that try to sort out the percents of actual usage as a way to get around the lack of adjustment, calling channel 'sales' etc. But they are in no way statistically sound so their results are suspect. Generally they are tied to mobile ad companies so all they see are the usage of apps that have their ads and they might be in a skewed number of apps in each OS etc. But even then they tend to show equal or slightly higher numbers for iOS versus Android which is at least interesting. And then there's the media coverage of big buys like when LAUSD went with iPads rather than Surface (which apparently Microsoft is willing to give to schools for like 25% the retail cost). We don't see many big companies and school districts going with Android or Windows. Or least not press on it. Again not statistically sound as a marker but interesting.

All this said, what is more important (or should be) than share is profit and Apple seems to have nailed that. So what that they might have only sold 5 Million iPhones this past year compared to say 5 times that with Android and Windows if it turns out that each iPhone makes 6-7 times the profit of the other phones. Unfortunately for Apple the analysts are too busy pulling numbers out of their butts, ignoring that year after year Apple sells more than the previous and so on. And the hit whoring press is more than happy to push out the doom and gloom to get page hits

For all we know, Apple may be surreptitiously working on its own versions of driverless cars, wearable tech glasses,

I highly doubt it. Apple could have gotten into these things, smart tvs etc a long time ago if they wanted.

But I do agree that they are very likely working on advances that might be useful to such things (and thus make Apple money via patents) and who knows what else.

I think some of what Apple might be working on could end up being innovations that don't actually involve making a new hardware. What if iWatch and Apple TV aren't about hardware but actually a new scheme to watch tv and movies in a way that is more consumer friendly and works across devices. Getting the cable companies, studios etc on board with creating parity to physical disks, better quality and pricing, breaking down global lines to reduce torrents and so on. Something that allows you access to all the same things regardless of whether you use your computer, iPad, iPhone, Apple TV box etc. Apple does think in such ways even if the public doesn't.

What if all this hiring, talks with the FDA etc isn't about making a new wrist band but helping those that do make them make better ones. Creating tools that make them work better with Apple stuff in a way not unlike how iOS is created alongside the hardware. Not just by creating SDK for the hardware makers to understand iOS but by understanding the factors involved in making the hardware, the rules of play legally etc. The move to the M7 could be a part of that.

Who knows since Apple stays mum until they have to speak up or can't avoid something being public record due to patent filings.

OFFS. It doesn't matter how popular it was before Apple made it. If it was available to consumers then it is only a new product category in Apple's line-up... regardless of its popularity prior to the introduction.

A new new product category is something that was never available to consumers prior to that time... the first cars, the first steam engines, the first computers, the first home computers... or any other zillion different products.

If it was available on the shelves before Apple made its product then it is only new to Apple.

Yes that would make sense except for the fact that he threw in 'reasonable person'. I'd say that there are a great many 'reasonable' people that believe the iPad is the first tablet ever to exist. I'm more apt to agree with you but you can't completely dismiss my point.

How many reasonable people believe Ford invented the car, or Columbus discovered America? Perception is often stronger than reality, and I'm reading what was implied rather than what was said.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

i wish those things came from apple and i dont give a rats butt what wall street analysts would dub them. We have to agree google is doing some serious inovative work, either cars, robotics, glass ect.. its got its ship steering in the right direction. Apple should step up its game and should invest like hell in providing services. This is were all the money is. I want to see iwallet, improved icloud and stuff like that come to market in 2014

"This is where the money is?!" Are you kidding me? It's certainly not where the money is for Google, where 90% of their profits come from advertising revenue. For Google, advertising is where the money is. Compare Google's profits to Apple's someday. Apple is having absolutely no problem making money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69

The vast majority of people think that the iPad was the first tablet thus for them it was a 'new product category'.

Well it was the first tablet that anyone bought or was useful in any way. So, there is that.